incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Cliff Schmidt" <>
Subject RE: The 50% Rule
Date Tue, 15 Jun 2004 00:08:28 GMT
Leo Simons wrote on Monday, June 14, 2004 4:01 PM:

> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> The more quantitative it is, the more a new project can know what
>> they have ahead of them and the less familiarity with the project's
>> community is required to cast an informed vote on graduation (just
>> look up the numbers).
> I know an example or two of unhealthy communites where all the numbers
> look just fine. Its just not possible to decide these things based on
> numbers. People interactions are only "measurable" on a statistical
> scale, which we don't have.

I completely agree; this is exactly what I'm concerned with.  I was just 
trying to (in case this wasn't clear to anyone) describe two different 
approaches to the problem.  The other approach:

Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> The less quantitative the rules are, the more
> room the voting members have to consider the "know it when you see
> it" view of the community.

is necessary to some extent, IMO.  Hence my suggestion that:

> Personally, I'd like to see one or two quantitative rules (such as one
> about independent committers to allow for vetoes) and then leave the
> rest up to a voting body that will evaluate graduation against some
> general guidelines.  


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message